|
Title: Libsecp256k1 post deleted ??? Post by: calkob on February 03, 2016, 12:01:26 AM Very good graphics and easy to understand, one thing i dont get is this Libsecp256k1 how can we verify transactions and blocks faster? would that not mean a shorter blocktime?
I got the comment above deleted from a thread earlier, it was a genuine question, just curious why it would have been deleted? ??? anyone any ideas? Title: Re: Libsecp256k1 post deleted ??? Post by: hilariousandco on February 03, 2016, 12:10:40 AM From which thread?
Title: Re: Libsecp256k1 post deleted ??? Post by: The Sceptical Chymist on February 03, 2016, 12:25:25 AM Dunno, was it on-topic? Sounds like it was, but I can't answer for the mods here. They've deleted some of my posts but it's always been obvious to me why they did it. Sometimes if you quote something that's getting nuked, your post will get nuked as well. Just accept it and move on.
Title: Re: Libsecp256k1 post deleted ??? Post by: shorena on February 03, 2016, 06:45:22 AM Very good graphics and easy to understand, one thing i dont get is this Libsecp256k1 how can we verify transactions and blocks faster? would that not mean a shorter blocktime? I got the comment above deleted from a thread earlier, it was a genuine question, just curious why it would have been deleted? ??? anyone any ideas? I assume you are talking about Lauda's thread[1]. My post for a correction on SigWit and full nodes was deleted as well and is quoted in the OP. Its apparently how Lauda runs the thread. Lauda's answer is here[2], tl;dr: Libsecp256k1 speed up will not make finding blocks faster, but verifying blocks and transactions faster. Blocktime will stay the same, but miners and full nodes will operate more efficient. [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1349965.0 [2] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1349965.msg13756963#msg13756963 Title: Re: Libsecp256k1 post deleted ??? Post by: Quickseller on February 03, 2016, 07:17:08 AM Its apparently how Lauda runs the thread. I am not sure how I feel about this. Especially in a thread regarding something as contentious as the block size debate. I can't say that I agree with the moderation policy broadly regarding the block size debate, however it is at least fairly clearly defined and for the most part uniformly enforced. I also believe it was designed in a way that theymos believes to be in the best interest in the long term success of Bitcoin (even though I disagree with this conclusion). On one hand anyone (except some scammers) can start a self-moderated topic and delete posts as they see fit in any sub (except meta and scam accusations). This feature may allow staff members to start a marketplace thread in which they can delete posts as they see fit without violating any conflict of interest rules. On the other hand, staff members are often seen as representatives of the forum (regardless of if this is fact, and regardless of if they are speaking/acting on behalf of the forum), and self-moderating a thread that has to do with the block size debate could create the appearance that the moderation policy is more radical then is reality. I know next to nothing about Libsecp256k1 with the exception of what shorena posted above, however it does not appear to violate any of Bitcoin's fundamental rules Title: Re: Libsecp256k1 post deleted ??? Post by: Lauda on February 03, 2016, 09:58:54 AM Its apparently how Lauda runs the thread. I am not sure how I feel about this. Especially in a thread regarding something as contentious as the block size debate. Quote This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. I clean the thread and reply to almost everyone, there's nothing wrong with it.OP I've replied to your post here. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1349965.msg13756963#msg13756963) |